Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com>
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Schneier, Data and Goliath: no hope for privacy
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 22:01:32 -0300
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 88
Message-ID: <87tt8odsb7.fsf@example.com>
References: <67b21894$14$17$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
	<RiKsP.173075$l629.51307@fx10.iad>
	<ae0c61cc-9814-04ab-75d4-f8d4cacdc9cd@example.net>
	<67b4fc88@news.ausics.net> <eli$2502181846@qaz.wtf>
	<67b659f8@news.ausics.net>
	<bf5148ef-af79-b5e5-0c95-3c3da83cbd67@example.net>
	<87mseggwo1.fsf@example.com> <87frk8gwji.fsf@example.com>
	<05f9e6d7-ae71-d73e-9244-2638790780ef@example.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 02:01:33 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0466f3d0c5e40b164175afc65c49539b";
	logging-data="3244962"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/BYUZZ4B+kjyFyDvd+m976+ymIqE55eeE="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/zXc7HAn/Lnx+d1xYoiwvwi1eFw=
	sha1:0sQejrvIpgAj3nL+afg/fm6GCvM=
Bytes: 5730

D <nospam@example.net> writes:

> On Thu, 20 Feb 2025, Salvador Mirzo wrote:
>
>> Salvador Mirzo <smirzo@example.com> writes:
>>
>>> D <nospam@example.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2025, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In comp.misc, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> Indeed, so long as you block all FB's scripts and images on
>>>>>>> otherwise unrelated websites. Although I don't tend to make close
>>>>>>> friends so I don't need to worry about controlling their FB usage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't stop people from posting about you on FB. (Or worse, posting
>>>>>> photos of you on there.)
>>>>>
>>>>> What I don't tell, they can't post, and the same with what they
>>>>> don't photograph. Although I guess that does leave a bit of an
>>>>> information vacuum there which some nutcase could exploit to make
>>>>> up missing personal info/photos on me if they so desired.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quite mysteriously, all sorts of otherwise respectable open-source
>>>>>>> software developers are happy to use GitHub even though it's owned
>>>>>>> by M$. So even having ditched their software long ago, M$ are now
>>>>>>> very hard to avoid online if, ironically, you want to use, and
>>>>>>> especially work on, open-source software. I find that truely
>>>>>>> unfathomable, but others barely seem to see my problem with it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many, I suspect, started using Github before Microsoft bought them in
>>>>>> 2018.
>>>>>
>>>>> For software projects I use, many more seem to have moved to there
>>>>> since 2018 than before. You'd think they like the M$ acquisition.
>>>>> Occasionally I object and am ignored.
>>>>
>>>> You have been heard! I will not be hosting my stuff on github. On the
>>>> other hand, I have nothing interesting to host, so perhaps a moot
>>>> point. ;) My home made scripts and little utilities live on my laptop
>>>> and sometimes on my server, and are shared upon request.
>>>
>>> I think most little scripts should be documented (with a manual) and put
>>> online.  It will make it easier for others to use and it will certainly
>>> encourage others to improve it and share the improvement.  So you could
>>> see your little script turn into a nice polished program simply because
>>> someone saw the idea and knew what to do to make it a lot better.  Could
>>> be a good source of joy.
>>>
>>> One time I wrote a function---just a function---and added to some
>>> archive online.  This was a pretty niche programming language.  Years
>>> later, I looked it up---I was still called the author of the function,
>>> but the code was completely rewritten, with much more expertise
>>> knowledge.  I thought it was ironic that my name was still there.  We
>>> value the pioneer perhaps too much.
>>>
>>>>>> Lately I've been seeing people advocating for a switch to
>>>>>> Codeberg.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know about Codeberg, but there have been lots of
>>>>> alternatives all along. Tons of projects switched from SourceForge
>>>>> to GitHub. Many projects have their own websites too, so why not
>>>>> self-host? GitHub do offer a lot of extra features for free, but
>>>>> that's dealing with the devil IMHO. Especially as the more tied in
>>>>> to GitHub-specific systems a project gets, the less practical it is
>>>>> to move away if M$ get more greedy later on.
>>>>
>>>> I have heard about gitea. It seems as if it allows you to setup
>>>> graphical git hosting yourself. I personally use a fossil repository
>>>> accessible only over ssh. I don't use any of the wiki/ticket/chat
>>>> functionality included in it.
>>>
>>> There's Forgejo, too.  It looks very good.  Like in Github, you can
>>> disable all such modules---wiki, ticket system et cetera.
>>
>> Sorry---you'd have to switch to git.  I don't think Gitea or Forgejo
>> work with fossil.  But fossil has its own web server, so you'd be fine
>> with it, too.
>
> This is the truth. I'm a contrarian kind of guy, so when the world
> goes git, I go fossil. ;) Jokes aside, I like the concept of one
> binary and how it works for my own personal use case.

I went fossil when I had to teach a class.  I thought git was more
complicated than fossil.  But it turns out that fossil was seen as
crazily complicated by nearly all students (anyway).  I think fossil is
just fine, though I confess I prefer the file system over a database.